Contact: [email protected]

Researchers from the University of Michigan are hoping their new study will inspire some Americans to rethink their relationship with laundry. Because, no matter how you spin it, clothes dryers use a lot of comparatively costly energy when air works for free.

Household dryers in the U.S. consume about 3% of our residential energy budget, about six times that used by washing machines. Collectively, dryers cost more than $7 billion to power each year in this country, and generating that energy emits the equivalent of more than 27 million tons of carbon dioxide.

The U.S. also leads the world in dryer ownership, with more than 80% of homes having one, compared with less than 30% in South Korea, just over 40% in Germany and just under 60% in the United Kingdom.

That got researchers in the U-M School for Environment and Sustainability (SEAS) wondering what it would mean for the average American household if we warmed up to air drying.

“In most other places in the world, it’s hard to find a clothes dryer,” said Zhu Zhu, the lead author of the new study who performed the work as a master’s student. He is now a doctoral student at Purdue University.

“We know dryers consume a lot of energy, so what if you used line drying instead? How much could you save? How many CO2 emissions could you avoid?” Zhu said.

Under the guidance of Shelie Miller, SEAS professor and co-director of the U-M Center for Sustainable Systems, Zhu investigated the costs and emissions associated with different drying technology behaviors in the U.S.

Over the lifetime of a dryer, 100% line drying could save a household upwards of $2,100. That would also cut back CO2 emissions by more than 3 tons per household over the same time. Though the contrast between dryers and line drying is stark, it’s not surprising, the researchers said.

“We knew that line drying was going to be zero and dryers were going to be a bunch,” Miller said.

Still, the duo did find some striking results in its analysis, published in the journal Resources, Conservation, and Recycling.

For example, a mixture of line drying and dryer use proved to be the second most economical and eco-friendly option, over changes like upgrading to more efficient dryers. And, in some cases, households that invested in more energy-efficient dryers wouldn’t end up saving money in the long run.

“We tend to focus on technological improvements, but a lot of the time, behavioral changes can have larger impacts,” Miller said. “If we are going to tackle climate change, we have to think about both cultural and technical solutions.”

The study also underscored an important wrinkle in the emissions due to clothes drying: They vary greatly from region to region in the U.S. In areas powered primarily by coal, for example, dryers are going to lead to more emissions than areas relying more heavily on sustainable options, like hydroelectric power.

So the fact that there is variation makes sense, but the size of it is staggering. Depending on where the change is made, switching from a gas dryer to an electric dryer can reduce emissions by more than 90% or increase them by more than 220%.

Thus, moving toward a cleaner energy grid is another technical solution to reduce the impact of dryers. But for those who don’t want to wait, line drying is a clean, virtually free option at their fingertips.

Study: The Relative Benefits of Electrification, Energy Efficiency, and Line Drying Clothes in the United States (DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2025.108212)

Read the full press release on the Michigan News website.